---
tags: 2i2c, team meeting
---

# 2i2c team meeting

This is a template for our 2i2c team meetings! Follow the structure below to get the meeting rolling.

- [**Meeting Zoom link**](http://zoom.2i2c.org)
- [**Cuckoo.team link**](https://cuckoo.team/2i2c)
- [**Meeting Notes Archive**](https://team-compass.2i2c.org/en/latest/meetings/eng/2022.html)

## 2022-08 (postponed)

- Facilitator: ?
- Notetaker: ?
- Timekeeper: ?

### Agenda items

_Brainstorm any ideas for the agenda here. Before the meeting, the facilitator should convert these into one section for each agenda item._

-
-
-

### Follow-up items

-
-
-

# 2022-07 (not yet uploaded to https://team-compass.2i2c.org/en/latest/meetings/eng/2022.html)

- Facilitator: @choldgraf
- Notetaker: @damianavila
- Timekeeper: @damianavila

## Overview of the CZI grant we're about to put in

- https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/19nctEEZxt8qrpw9CztHq7fb1om-vKXA5lhymxU2d7EE/edit#slide=id.g136d832a7f1_0_525
- Context about where we are now
- High-level description of the service
- Quick slides to follow up with the main idea (needs link)
- CZI rejected all the proposal except ours (likely to be funded)
- Figuring out the service model and working with partners is the main thing for this grant
- Main goles described in the slide
- Core problems
- Service model
- Collaboration between eng, comm infra and comm leader
- Not only infrastrcuture, collab about communitities
- 2i2c involved in tech infrastructure, content and training
- Shared-responsability model
- Questions
- DA:
- Concerns: how much work will this create for us?
- Need more specific #s about the communities that we will be able to serve
- Which kinds of communities would this serve?
- Need to make it clear that there is some kind of cap to the number of communities we can serve
- With these resources we are going to be able to serve XXX hubs.
- CH: What's a decision criteria that could help us choose one community over another?
- JM: If we can have a relatively replicable service or model, it could be much more scalable.
- Probably not supporting specialized, high numbers of users, huge universities, etc.
- "Prioritize the long tail of communities that could use access".
- "If the infrastructure is almost the same, we could probably serve dozens of communities"
- DA: What hub personas would we focus on?
- Educational and event hubs are very different
- CH: Should we focus on a few more complex hubs, and a majority of more straightforward / replicable hub?
- DA: If we can define the "hub personas" ahead of time, we will more easily be able to quickly funnel a community into a particular pathway.
- This will make it easier to templatize the service and the pathway.
- Proposal should embrace the idea of defining user personas
- GD: limit new complex leads to serve the collab?
- We are growing capacity as a team, and need to ensure that this focuses our _team goals_ on the communities we mention here.
- We should re-align our priorities to serve the communities in this grant, if we feel bottlenecked on our capacity elsewhere.
- SG: When we grow our responsibilities via a grant, this grows the responsibilities of the *team* not just one person.
- However, this may not be the experience of the people giving us money.
- We should make sure that they understand the nature of how 2i2c's model shares responsibility across the team.
- This should be in the proposal as well so it's clear what kind of a service 2i2c runs.
- JM: In-kind support that 2i2c is providing?
- Is there some expectation that the FTEs supported by other projects will be participating in this grant?
- Yes, this is basically the model that 2i2c follows in general. We should make it clear in the grant text.
- YP: We should not tightly link new *hires* for people that are linked to grants.
- **todo**: Ask CZI how we should handle FTE funding that is effectively for a *team* of people.
- JM: Cloud costs seem really small as a % of our operating
- We should increase the cloud infrastructure budget.
- CH: Should we just pick a number?
- SG: $100K a year!
- YP: $100K a year is about what Berkeley spends on 10,000 users a month for education use-cases.
- CH: Our strategy should be to ask for more than we need, and to define an internal "high number" and "minimal / low number".
- A: feedback from CZI, our budget is fixed so if we want more cloud it will have to come out of personnel spend.
- And either way, we should find a way to get credits.
- It's easier to re-purpose budget than to ask for more budget if you need it.

- "Hub personas" as a central issue touching several pieces of the 2i2c organization
- TODO: Next steps there should be to make a plan for how we'll keep this on the "Backburner" over time and occasionally have planned attempts at learning more about them.

## Follow-up items

-
-
-